This week, you will begin to synthesize the information you have gathered and the analysis you have conducted of your selected technology. In order to bring your ideas together and prepare for your final presentation, you will complete a recommendation analysis.
The recommendation analysis should provide three to four concrete recommendations for how to best utilize your selected technology.
As part of your analysis, include the following.
Introduction: Explain your selected technology and provide contextual details concerning application and reach.
Thesis: Offer an argument to synthesize your ideas and provide a foundation for your recommendations and analysis.
Ethical Dilemmas: Identify and describe three to four ethical dilemmas posed by your selected technology. Include concrete examples and ethical theories to help detail your summary.
Recommendations: Offer concrete recommendations to help mediate each of the described dilemmas. Remember to consider stakeholders and resources for providing solutions.
Conclusion: Summarize your main arguments and provide avenues for further discussion.
As part of this assignment, you must consult and site at least three high-quality, academic sources. These sources should be from reputable publications that can be found in the academic Library or industry publications.
A successful assignment will
be three to four pages in length;
include a minimum of three academic sources;
be composed using Microsoft Word and using 12-point Times New Roman;
include a minimum of three sources; and
be formatted and cite sources using the seventh edition of APA.
Electric vehicles (EV Technology)
LMA.GE.LAS432.JAN22
Criteria
Ratings
Pts
Final Paper Recommendations: Critical Thinking
26 to >23.0 pts
Excellent
The paper includes a strong, original central idea that provides a unified trajectory of inquiry and analysis that is sustained throughout.
23 to >20.0 pts
Competent
The paper includes a central idea with few tangents and diversions that unifies the argument but lacks clarity or creativity.
20 to >17.0 pts
Limited
The paper attempts to form a cohesive idea, but lacks concrete focus and unification of key components.
17 to >14.0 pts
Poor
The paper has no unifying central idea to link key components of the argument together.
14 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
The paper does not address this competency.
26 pts
Final Paper: Communication
16 to >14.0 pts
Excellent
The paper clearly communicates central ideas through precise use of language, attention to audience, grammar and mechanics, and communication conventions and formats appropriate to the genre.
14 to >12.0 pts
Competent
The paper communicates central ideas by demonstrating proficient use of language, audience awareness, grammar and mechanics and communication conventions appropriate to the genre.
12 to >10.0 pts
Limited
The paper attempts to communicate central ideas, but needs more proficient use of language, stronger attention to audience, and a more precise utilization of communication conventions. Grammar and mechanics needs improvement.
10 to >8.0 pts
Poor
The paper lacks a clear understanding of language usage, audience awareness, and communication competence. Grammar and mechanics inhibit understanding.
8 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
The paper does not address this competency
16 pts
Final Paper: Information Literacy
21 to >19.0 pts
Excellent
The paper demonstrates a strong development of central arguments through detailed examples and evidence of appropriate and resourceful academic research. Evidence is used to forward the argument and develop conclusions and recommendations.
19 to >17.0 pts
Competent
The paper uses key examples from mostly reputable sources to develop a central argument. Evidence could be utilized more efficiently to facilitate conclusions and recommendations.
17 to >15.0 pts
Limited
The paper uses limited, incomplete, or inappropriate information as vague support for central ideas. Evidence is not cohesively connected to conclusions and recommendations.
15 to >13.0 pts
Poor
The central argument is not supported or developed through evidence. The paper lacks detailed conclusions and recommendations.
13 to >0 pts
Do Not Meet Expectations
The paper does not address this competency
21 pts
Final Paper: Technology Literacy
16 to >14.0 pts
Excellent
The paper demonstrates a clear understanding of the technology studied and includes thoughtful and original assessments.
14 to >12.0 pts
Competent
The paper leverages some knowledge of contemporary technologies and offers some assessment
12 to >10.0 pts
Limited
The paper demonstrates minimal knowledge of contemporary technologies and offers limited assessment.
10 to >8.0 pts
Poor
The paper lacks a clear knowledge of contemporary technologies.
8 to >0 pts
Do Not Meet Expectations
The paper does not address this competency
16 pts
Final Paper: Cultural Competence
21 to >19.0 pts
Excellent
The paper demonstrates strong evidence of diverse fields of knowledge and illustrates a creative thought processes to address global problems.
19 to >17.0 pts
Competent
The paper demonstrates some evidence of multiple fields of knowledge and illustrates competence in problem solving.
17 to >15.0 pts
Limited
The paper demonstrates limited evidence of few or limited fields of knowledge and lacks creative problem solving.
15 to >13.0 pts
Poor
The paper lacks clear evidence does not include multiple fields of knowledge as evidence and lacks problem solving skills.
13 to >0 pts
Do Not Meet Expectations
The paper does not address this competency
21 pts
Final Paper: Global Awareness and Civic Engagement
26 to >23.0 pts
Excellent
The paper demonstrates a clear sense of global awareness through concrete recommendations for action.
23 to >20.0 pts
Competent
The paper demonstrates some notions of global awareness and makes at least one recommendation for action.
20 to >17.0 pts
Limited
The paper demonstrates a vague sense of global awareness and does not include specific recommendations for action.
17 to >14.0 pts
Poor
The paper lacks global awareness of contemporary issues and makes no recommendations for action.
14 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
The paper does not address this competency
26 pts
GE.SPCH275.A.Critical Thinking
SPCH275 Student Mastery of Critical Thinking skills
threshold: 3.0 pts
4 pts
Excellent: Student Performance: Strong, original central idea that provides a unified trajectory of inquiry and analysis that is sustained throughout.
3 pts
Competent: Student Performance: Central ideas with few tangents and diversions that unifies the argument but lacks clarity or creativity.
2 pts
Limited: Student Performance: Attempts to form a cohesive idea, but lacks concrete focus and unification of key component
1 pts
Poor: Student Performance: No unifying central idea to link key components of the argument together.
0 pts
Does Not Meet ExpectationsUnacceptable: Student Performance: Does not demonstrate this competency.
4 pts
GE.SPCH275.B.Communication
threshold: 3.0 pts
4 pts
Excellent: Communicates a central idea through precise use of language, attention to audience, grammar and mechanics, and communication conventions and formats appropriate to the genre.
3 pts
Competent: Communicates a central idea by demonstrating proficient use of language, audience awareness, grammar and mechanics and communication conventions appropriate to the genre.
2 pts
Limited: Attempts to communicate a central idea, but needs more proficient use of language, stronger attention to audience, and a more precise utilization of communication conventions. Grammar and mechanics need improvement.
1 pts
Poor: Lacks a clear understanding of language usage, audience awareness, and communication competence. Grammar and mechanics inhibit understanding.
0 pts
Unacceptable: Does not demonstrate this competency
4 pts
GE.SPCH275.C.Information Literacy
threshold: 3.0 pts
4 pts
Excellent: Strong development of central arguments through detailed examples and evidence of appropriate and resourceful academic research.
3 pts
Competent: Uses key examples from mostly reputable sources to develop a central argument. Evidence could be utilized more efficiently to support claims.
2 pts
Limited: Uses limited, incomplete, or inappropriate information as vague support for central ideas. Evidence is not cohesively connected to main ideas.
1 pts
Poor: The central argument is not supported or developed through evidence.
0 pts
Unacceptable: Student Performance: Does not demonstrate this competency.
4 pts
GE.SPCH275.D.Technology Literacy
threshold: 3.0 pts
4 pts
Excellent: Demonstrates clear understanding of the technology for creating presentation materials to support speech making. Utilizes media and electronic resources to achieve assignment goals
3 pts
Competent: Demonstrates some knowledge of technology for creating presentation materials to support speech making. Media and electronic resources to support assignment requirements.
2 pts
Limited: Minimal knowledge of the technology for creating presentation materials to support speech making. Utilizes media and electronic resources superficially for minimal impact.
1 pts
Poor: Lacks a clear knowledge of the technology for creating presentation materials to support speech making. Does not utilize media and electronic resources effectively.
0 pts
Unacceptable: Student Performance: Does not demonstrate this competency.
4 pts
GE.SPCH275.E.Cultural Competence
threshold: 3.0 pts
4 pts
Excellent: Strong evidence of audience awareness.
3 pts
Competent: Some evidence of audience awareness.
2 pts
Fair: Limited evidence of audience awareness.
1 pts
Poor: Lacks audience awareness.
0 pts
Unacceptable: Does not demonstrate this competency
4 pts
GE.SPCH275.F.Global Awareness & Civic Engagement
threshold: 3.0 pts
4 pts
Excellent: Demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the speech preparation process, and using visual elements to effectively engage the audience.
3 pts
Competent: Demonstrates proficient understanding of the speech preparation process, and using visual elements to effectively engage the audience.
2 pts
Limited: demonstrates a vague understanding of the speech preparation process and using visual elements to effectively engage the audience.
1 pts
Poor: lack understanding of the speech preparation process and using visual elements to effectively engage the audience.
0 pts
Unacceptable: Does not demonstrate this competency
4 pts
Total Points: 150
PreviousNext